Comments on: Should Online Dating Services Perform Criminal Background Checks?

By: Ken March

Ken March — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 06:08:00 +0000

I feel background checks should be manditory. I’ve been stung by a visa/tickets scam artist and a woman I met overseas not only turned out to be a gold-digger, but also a very abusive and manipulative person with severe mental problems. Having background checks conducted ensures that only genuine and safe people are allowed.

By: Richard Williams

Richard Williams — Thu, 14 Dec 2006 08:07:40 +0000

Herb Vest should be in JAIL for defrauding Senior Citizens and other lonely hearts with SPOOFED PROFILES, computer-generated “winks” and e-mails from his EMPLOYEES to get the free member to become “paid” members…make that SUCKERS ! True.com is NOT endorsed by PSYCHOLOGY TODAY and anyone with a valid credit card can become a member with no questions asked. “Safer dating” and “background checks” are just more FALSE ADVERTISING from True.com. A real SCAM site that needs to be reported to IC3 (FBI affiliate)I got SCAMMED out of $101.96 in just 28 days…his employee kept me thinking she lived 15 miles away and that we would soon go to lunch together. We exchanged e-mails for about 60 days. Herb is a multi-millionaire with NO REASON to be scamming anyone. See complaints at “the lazy genius::True.com Scam” for more horror tales about True.com and its criminal CEO who is trying to squash the competition and corner the internet dating business. See the DallasNews.com story “Dallas man behind computer dating bill”….$25,000 to the Texas Attorney General in 2000,plus ten of thousands in other “donations” to influence the politicians to get laws passed favorable to True.com and the criminals that are running this SCAM website. True.com was once known as TrueBeginnings.com….I think there are some lawsuits about TrueBeginnings. If enough of us SUCKERS would complain to the TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL at CAC@OAG.STATE.TX.US then maybe True.com will get the axe and the criminals will be carted off to prison where they belong.

By: Ron

Ron — Wed, 09 Aug 2006 23:13:43 +0000

So, I guess I can’t date anymore since I have a 23 year old felony from back when I had a drug problem. Funny I’ve been sober all these years too and as a matter of fact I am known on occasion to walk on water. I went back to court and had my rights re-instated except for the firearm one. But I will remain humble and besides how can I compete with all those perfect people out there. Ooops, not perfect, they just haven’t been caught doing any stupid shit yet.

By: Dan

Dan — Tue, 07 Jun 2005 23:29:09 +0000

What a stupid idea! Felon’s don’t loose their right to privacy. As I recall there is no law against people because they MAY commit a crime.

As for that stupid “WARNING” it didn’t become law any where. What makes a man that has been married 3 times think he can change the divorce rate? MORON!!

I don’t think Herb has read any on the changes some of the states wanted. A big one was to use the state law enforcement to do the background checks and charge fees for each check at the very least 20 bucks, and use the money to fund state programs. There goes that buck fifty True said it would cost.

Hey Herb why not offer background checks as a service. If someone is going to meet someone in person they could run a check on them before the date.

You better require a WARNING. True is not reponsible for NUTS, RAPIST, GOLD-DIGGERS, SLACKERS,CROSS DRESSERS, RACISIMS, SATIN WORSHIPERS, ABUSIVE, CONTROLLING, SICKO’S

By: Herb Vest, CEO of True

Herb Vest, CEO of True — Tue, 07 Jun 2005 14:52:13 +0000

Dave,
When a person is convicted of a felony, it becomes a matter of public record. FBI stats indicate that 2 out of 3 convicted felons go on to commit another felony.

When a person decides to commit a felony, they give up a certain amount of privacy. I wish the criminal justice systems allowed a way for ex-felons to earn back the respect that they have volunteerily given up. Alas, at present, no way has been provided.

Harry,
Bars or grocery stores are not holding themselves out as dating services. Further, they do not use interstate communication devices to introduce their patrons to other people.

True has publicly offered its advice for free to smaller dating sites to help them install criminal background searchs. My hope is that when the law becomes effective, that most dating sites will offer background searches. When they do, True will have lost a differentiator. In other words, when the law becomes effective, it will actually hurt our business in the short run. In the long run, all internet dating sites will benefit as internet dating begins to be perceived as a safer way to date.

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 06 Jun 2005 01:48:03 +0000

that’s rediculous to require background checks. is there no privacy any more? plenty of people have done things in their past they are not particularly proud of.
some wound up with records ,some not. there are also alot of total jerks and manipulative people without criminal records. if someone is stupid enough to get in a situation where they get abused through a dating service then they are probably going to get hurt anyway

By: Harry Ardor

Harry Ardor — Thu, 02 Jun 2005 18:03:48 +0000

Background checks for online dating services should be required when background checks for entry into single’s bars, grocery stores, weddings and other places singles may meet are required…

By: Scott Holder

Scott Holder — Thu, 02 Jun 2005 10:35:40 +0000

I think it should be required. Those services should also be required to confirm that a person is single. Married people should not be allowed to use these services. Surely there is a way to verify that. I know of one person whe met a guy from CA who was still married and living with his wife. She didn’t know all of that. He came to see her in LA and swept her off her feet. Since he was married he had to file for a divorce. That meant he had to wait to marry the girl from LA. She packed up and moved to CA and waited for the guy to get a divorce. Now she is miserable and won’t get out of the marriage because she saw this as her one and only chance to get married. He, on the other hand, saw it as a way to get a woman to come take care of the house. It is a sad state for her and we tried to warn her. The service they used was notified that the man was not a single individual. They said it was their policy to only allow singles but this one got through. Making it a requirement to do a full background (criminal too) check would solve this and a lot of other problems.